Login with username and password (forgot your password?)

[C++]

What's up with having two casts (ie., (LONG)(LONG_PTR))? A single (LONG_PTR) ought to suffice

...Ought to, being the operative part ...But results in:
warning C4244: 'function' : conversion from 'LONG_PTR' to 'LONG', possible loss of data

However, Originally I was using a single Line of code for both (e.g. no compile time switching), so I needed to get that single line to work on/for both the 32 & 64 bit versions ...(and I insist on the code compiling with zero errors or warnings)... Which is I think how I landed there. Did I mention that this (or rather that 4 year ago project) was my baptism by fire in the pointer casting department.

I did some quick testing and now have:

Formatted for C++ with the GeSHI Syntax Highlighter [copy or print]
 oldWndProc = (WNDPROC)(LONG_PTR)GetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC);
//==================================================================================
#if defined _M_IX86 //---------------+++--> IF Compiling This as a 32-bit Clock Use:
  SetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC, (LONG)(LRESULT)WndProc);
 
//==================================================================================
#else //-------------------+++--> ELSE Assume: _M_X64 - IT's a 64-bit Clock and Use:
  SetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC, (LONG_PTR)(LRESULT)WndProc);
 
#endif
//==================================================================================
 SetClassLong(hwndClock, GCL_STYLE, GetClassLong(hwndClock, GCL_STYLE) & ~CS_DBLCLKS);

...Which works on both 32 & 64 bit test machines. I could try running a few tests with just (LONG_PTR)(LRESULT) for both after work if you think it would be cleaner, but for now I'm just glad to be done abusing my server.

Only x64 machines I have are my main (Win 7) dev machine and my (Win 2k3 R2) domain controller. Repeatedly crashing the shell on the dev machine makes it impossible to keep my notes in order ... So I've been torching the shell over & over via Terminal Services for the last few days on the Domain Controller. Which says a lot for TS as in over 100+ shell hangs/crashes the original session never disconnected once and the box is still stable.

Disclaimer: (Kids do not try this at home) This is not considered a good practice or even recommended behavior... (It's actually rather stupid)

[C++]

ouch, thats a tricky one.

Quite true, but it was at least almost (but not quite) twice as much fun as trimming your toenails with a chainsaw...

But seriously... Being that I have multiple project files pointing at the same source pool, the 32-bit compile complained about the pointer conversion (might cause data loss (yada, yada, yada...)). So I had to make it conditional at compile time, which ends up being this:

Formatted for C++ with the GeSHI Syntax Highlighter [copy or print]
 oldWndProc = (WNDPROC)(LONG_PTR)GetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC);
//==================================================================================
#if defined _M_IX86 //---------------+++--> IF Compiling This as a 32-bit Clock Use:
  SetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC, (LONG)(LONG_PTR)WndProc);
 
//==================================================================================
#else //-------------------+++--> ELSE Assume: _M_X64 - IT's a 64-bit Clock and Use:
  SetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC, (LONG_PTR)(LRESULT)WndProc);
 
#endif
//==================================================================================
 SetClassLong(hwndClock, GCL_STYLE, GetClassLong(hwndClock, GCL_STYLE) & ~CS_DBLCLKS);

Which compiles cleanly (no errors or warnings) and runs without crashing on both 32 & 64 bit test machines.

[Stoic Joker's T-Clock 2010]

Stoic Joker's T-Clock 2010

Application Name	T-Clock 2010
Version	Build 95
Short Description	Highly Configurable Taskbar Clock
Supported OSes	Windows 2000/XP/2003/Vista/2008/7 32 & 64 bit
Web Page	www.StoicJoker.com/TClock for general info. Download is still only available here.
Download Link	[attachurl=1]
Download Link	[attachurl=2] This is LonelyPixel's build containing Henriko's Week Number fix
System Requirements	Win2k or Higher Memory 512K
Version History	See Below
Author	Stoic Joker - Has officially closed the project as of Saturday March 10, 2012
Source Code	Now Available
-+-	LonelyPixel's GitHub Source Code Repository

Description
The Original TClock written by Kazubon in the early 90's was a popular classic that was on the edge of extinction when Windows started going 64bit. ...I simply chose not to let that happen.

Features
The Application's features.

Planned Features
Currently Open for Suggestions.

Screenshots
Screenshots of the Application.

Usage
Installation
Extract the .zip file (where you like) & run the program.

Using the Application
Hopefully this is all covered in the help file.

Uninstallation
Close Program & delete it.

Known Issues
Currently None - But I have faith that you guys will find something wrong with it...

Version History

Build 95 - Fixed Middle mouse button, and added the following features:

• PC Speaker alarm beep option (.pcb files)
• Locking Workstation Turns Off Monitor(s) (I Just Had to Try Doing This)
• System first week of year (used by popup calendar) adjustable via GUI
• Popup calendar options for 1, 3, or 12 month view (still needs work but is there)
• Added always on top option for calendar
• Added display am/pm as a/p, A/P, and  /p options

Build 90 - Added Font Quality option to resolve the Fuzzy Font Bugg, and Bouncing Alarm windows. (details)
Okay... It's 12/23/2010, So I either have to either release this thing or change the name.
Beta 8.5 Windows 2000 Support Returns! - Thanks to MSVS2008
Beta 8 ... Same as first 8 Just repacked properly - Not a clue how I screwed that up.
Beta 8 - End of High DPI Dialog Position Bugg (also added build # to About Tab)
Beta 7.5 - Fixed Logic Error which caused Alarm AM/PM setting to be ignored.
Beta 7.4 - Added Display (ISO) Week Numbers on Calendar Option, Close Calendar on Lose Focus Option, Calendar Dialog now dynamically resizes at runtime if/as needed (toggle Week Numbers to see), Added Miscellaneous Tab to Properties Dialog to Adjust Above.
Beta 7.3 - Added Option to have Alarm Ring X Times
Beta 7.2 - Added Option to have Alarm Chime the Hour.
Beta 7.1 - More Fun with the Alarm Tab Crash Bugg
Beta 7 - Rework of Alarms Page Control behavior & etc... (see thread for details)
Beta 6 - This is a rough draft of the requested Time Synchronization feature (details to follow).
Beta 5.5 - More mucking about with the infernal Hotkeys (which should finally be be nailed down at this point)
Beta 5.2 - Fixed Loss of (HotKey) Focus Bugg
Beta 5 - Now with configurable HotKeys (I'm way to tired to post details)

Revised request for Ordinal Date Added (two ways) and also added Day-Of-Year.
OD = Ordinal Date UTC
Od = Ordinal Date Local
DOY = Day of Year in (001 - 366) Decimal format.

Help file has been updated with new options - but it looks like hell
Found this request for the Julian Date in an Email, so I tossed it in (Formatting Option JD)
Added Hotkey Options for Stopwatch, Add/Edit Timers, & Timer Watch dialogs

6. The Properties Dialog Mouse Tab Crash Bugg is gone - Thanks to a T-Clock fan that (also happens to be a programmer) has been working with me via Email for the past few weeks.

5. There is an EasterEgg of sorts for the Win2k folk that (is easy to find in the registry) allows TC2010 to make the Desktop Icon Text Labels transparent.

4. Registry info structure has been modified slightly (Simplicity/Testing purposes) so TC2010 will not use/modify the TC3 configuration data.

3. Taskbar transparency has been brought back because (Um...) it seemed like the thing to do at the time. It has been tested and works on all the above.

2. It is stable, and has been tested on Win2k/XP/Server2k3 x64/7 x64 without any Shell hangs/crashes/etc.

1. Okay, so I finally managed to end up with something stable enough to share with the rest of the class ... There are a couple of things to be noted however: This is alpha so it ain't perfect.

Okay, So I've been trying to get this project back off the ground for a few years ... and as of late ... That's really been starting to bug me. Missing source code issues aside ...(long story documented elsewhere)... I still had the partially branded project file from the web server to work with. That copy however (actually all of them in retrospect...) had an issue with MSVS 2005 SP1, which caused a quite consistent shell crash on load. I confirmed this by compiling the code with MSVS 2005 (no service packs) and it did indeed run just fine. Hence the conclusion that either SP1 or something that SP1 didn't like about my code was the culprit.

I have spent the better part of the last 3 days hammering on this in an attempt to render that particular bugg nice and dead. I have succeeded. Hence (in a mild fit of artistic rage...) I have decided to display said buggs still twitching carcase here ... on the odd chance that someone may need to drive a similar stake through one of its cousins:

Formatted for C++ with the GeSHI Syntax Highlighter [copy or print]
 oldWndProc = (WNDPROC)(LONG_PTR)GetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC); // The x64 Bugg Was Here
  // SetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC, (LONG)(LONG_PTR)WndProc); <--+++----<<<<< FAIL Code!!!
  SetWindowLongPtr(hwndClock, GWL_WNDPROC, (LONG_PTR)(LRESULT)WndProc); //----+++--> This Fixed IT!!
  SetClassLong(hwndClock, GCL_STYLE, GetClassLong(hwndClock, GCL_STYLE) & ~CS_DBLCLKS);

Will TC2010 make it to release? I don't know. But this is a hell of a lot closer to a good start then I've been in the past 4 years.

 

[Quetzlzacatenango]

What the heck is in store bought salsa that makes it spark when microwaving it?

The merciless peppers of Quetzlzacatenango?

  ...Okay, I dare you to say that three times fast.

Coupons frequently have something to the effect of "Not valid in combination with any other offers" in extremely fine print on them somewhere. Which is understandable (kinda) to a point. but, I wouldn't call it greedy on your part, because I'd take the same shot hoping it would work.

Nuance is also good, but definitely not in the "fast" category as far as starting up.  Once in the application, it behaves quickly.  To me, speed is two different issues:  startup speed, and operating speed.  Nuance is great for operating speed.  Also, nuance has nice layout features and powerful editing features.  But I wouldn't use it for my viewer.

Hm... I've been toying with trying out the Free Nuance Reader - When you say it's slow, do you mean slower than Acrobat? ...or just "regular" slow?

IceSword looks interesting - But it appears to have fallen off the planet back in 2007. Is the Project/Author still active?

[un]

I smoke, I've done so for years, and it works well for me - Sit back, have a smoke, relax, & keep going. Much unlike the alternatives, smoking doesn't make you suicidal ... Which is why I maintain that cigarettes are much better for your health than anti-depressants.

[but CD-64 does seem considerably more responsive than CD-32 on either a 32-bit or 64-bit platform]

As for 64-bit OS's my experience is somewhat limited - to less than one week. What I can say is that I'm unable to use Visual Studio 2008 on that platform to actively develop CD as should I try to load the Main Settings dialog, Visual Studio crashes with an "out of memory" fault (and that's on a 4GiB machine). Instead I use a 2GiB 32-bit machine and that same dialog loads faultlessly (and with oodles of memory to spare). So, from my experience, running 32-bit applications on a 64-bit platform is not ideal hence my decision to release a 64-bit version of CD.

That is odd, as I'm still heavily using VS 2005 on Win7 x64 on a daily basis and it's never blinked. Both T-Clock32 & x64 were developed with VS 2005 on Vista x64 (back when), using two different project files that pointed at the same source pool.

As for 64-bit applications requiring more memory, you're probably correct however the extra amount of memory CD-64 requires (over CD-32) is negligible but CD-64 does seem considerably more responsive than CD-32 on either a 32-bit or 64-bit platform (assuming the CPUs are of equivalent speed).

I keep reading this (assuming I'm missing something) wondering how you're getting CD64 to run on a 32-bit platform - That's not supposed to be possible.

Side note: The only reason I had to create T-Clock x64 (which does use quite a bit more memory) was because of the Clock Window Shell Hook (injecting 32-bit hook into 64-bit process no worky), other then that it could have stayed 32-bit and been fine. (...Well except for the 9x era hardware access code that had to be stripped out for Vista).

[patent]

why would I pay someone to "reinvent the same wheel" over and over?

Because that's the only way you'll ever get a better wheel with a rubber tire instead of just the same old stone disk with a hole in it.

Unless, of course, somebody has previously obtained a patent for a "round object which rotates on a central axis" in which case you're stuck with the old wheel until the patent holder decides to put a rubber tire on it.
 

(Ah, yes, Progress hobbled by lawyers & red tape) Now there's a sadly acurate analogy for a lot of what's happening these days...

Add me to the list of folks requesting a portable version. I've been using Xteq's Xfind for doing basic string searches in server log files (4+ Gig of plain text) etc. ...But this looks way cooler.

Is portable version that can be installed on U3 smart drive only an appropriate solution?

While I can't quite put my finger on it ... There is just something about the U3 (smart?) drives that make me want to run screaming from the room. I like my drives dumb, predictable, and cooperative - As apposed to trying to guess what I need and out thinking me.

Desktop Icon Toy 
http://www.idesksoft.com/ 

Wow! That thing's still around?!? I used to love it back in the Win2k days. but gave it up when XP came out (features it had at the time were already in XP).

It certainly has grown since then.

Certainly seems like the logical way to do it, but it's much easier said than done.

True, but that's why you start with something small - It doesn't take a ton of energy to focus on. Most of the time we find ourselves trying to force ourselves into creative mode - Quick Say Something Brillient... (Um...) - Which fails every time.

The trick is to suck yourself into the project, by focusing on small point X throughout the day. Face it, we all spend a great deal of our day doing thing that don't exactly require our full attention... Use that time. Once you find an angle on the problem that you want to try, and have let it fester in you mind all day ... Getting started becomes much easier.

why would I pay someone to "reinvent the same wheel" over and over?

Because that's the only way you'll ever get a better wheel with a rubber tire instead of just the same old stone disk with a hole in it.

I've found that the fastest way to get anything done is to slow down - Screw the "Big Picture" it's fuzzy chaotic and detail-less. Well defined problems always have simple answers and frenetic motion just wastes energy. Stick to the nuts & bolts.

Looking at a project in it's entirety can/will quickly overwhelm you, so just pick part of it, an small part and boil it down to its most basic form ... Then do that. And the next bit, and the next...and pretty soon you'll find yourself at the other end if it - Done. Now step back for a "Big Picture" view of only that project. If anything is missing do that (only), if not move to next project.

it might be possible by specifying non-real FROM info, and using your real email only in the "REPLY-TO" field.

the only danger in this case might be that it might increase the chance of your email being marked as spam.

Doesn't quite guarantee it, but is awfully close. Forged headers require either an open relay, or relay permissions. Neither is a stellar option. Best bet is a batch of disposable addresses.

So just add commenting to the code in Hungarian...

 

I've no clue how many of what type of software licenses you're working with. But it seems that the best thing would be to try to get them to someone that really needs (or deserves) them. Perhaps a variation on the commenter's lottery where the comments state in short the level of desire/need they have for program X. Stipulate from the get go that 25 words or less (keep it succinct) is required, and that one liner (Gimme free stuff) entries will be automatically disqualified.

According to Mercury News, about 70% of AOL users also use Facebook

That pretty much explains the stupidity phenomenon to me... (Because) ...Nothing screams retard louder than an @AOL.com address.

And what's also pretty nasty is that automated SSH probes have lowered their rate a lot - enough to not get caught by stuff like fail2ban. At least the sweeps hitting my server.

I'm not familiar enough with that combo to gauge how low that would be, can you put a number on it for me? I keep the account lockout threshold pretty tight because the company is small enough that I don't mind manually unlocking an account if need be. But if it's going slow enough to get under/past that ... I may consider worrying.

Seems like we got half a plant full of script kiddies running port scans for targets to run dictionary attacks against. Our FTP server here has been attacked as many as 10 times in one day...which is quite a bit considering they're sustained 2hr attacks. I just snicker as the logs scroll by and wait for some one to complain that their account is locked out.

Have you looked at the download-able templates and such on the MS Office site? Our receptionist goes there quite a bit for misc. whatnot.

This is actually getting quite interesting   Let's take it up a notch, shall we?

Sure, I haven't had this much fun on the Internet in a while

From The Patriot Post:

The Obama administration has argued that Americans don't enjoy a "reasonable expectation of privacy" when it comes to their whereabouts as revealed by their cell phones, and therefore warrant-less tapping is allowed. Not only that, but lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" showing where calls were placed or received.

Now, you know that your cell phone has a GPS tracking device in it, and you make a call anyway.  If someone uses that information against you, your argument would be that the Obama Administration was correct in their argument?

Well... You're half right. The locality & time are standard items to track on any network, and if the phone carrier wishes to share their logs with the fuzz... Well... (sh)IT Happens.

Now on the second part, which is a rather mind blowing leap regarding warrant-less tapping. No, that ain't fair game for the phone carrier to just hand it over to the fuzz without warrant (pun intended). But that's the hiccup with any law enforcement agency - A never ending game of access - Which was created specifically to keep them honest. 10 years ago that would have been a simple question (answer: hell no), But with fear & the patriot act running rampant George Orwell's popularity is once again soaring.

I come from a time when there was us, and them - The A infamous Them, the fuzz, the man, big brother, etc. There was a core group of people you trusted and held dear, and the rest of the world sucked - Cops? ...Were just another street gang to be avoided.

[Side note] I've been sitting here rereading that last part for the past 20 minutes, and much as it sounds like the opening line of some lame-assed dime novel - I just can't fix it (I've been side tracked about 400 times - I'll try to do better on the next part). [/Side Note]


To take it further still, from the EFF:

Residences. Everyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in their home. This is not just a house as it says in the Fourth Amendment, but anywhere you live, be it an apartment, a hotel or motel room, or a mobile home.

However, even things in your home might be knowingly exposed to the public and lose their Fourth Amendment protection. For example, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in conversations or other sounds inside your home that a person outside could hear, or odors that a passerby could smell (although the Supreme Court has held that more invasive technological means of obtaining information about the inside of your home, like thermal imaging technology to detect heat sources, is a Fourth Amendment search requiring a warrant). Similarly, if you open your house to the public for a party, a political meeting, or some other public event, police officers could walk in posing as guests and look at or listen to whatever any of the other guests could, without having to get a warrant.

So, in the case that I am outside of your home, in a public location, do you still have a reasonable expectation of privacy?  It seems to only cover the inside of your home.[/quote]

Slippery slope of intent vs. discretion there. The Castle Doctrine states that you can defend your property with deadly force if being threatened. There is no obligation to flee or prove that one was cornered before taking the offensive. This being countered by proximity and the neighbors having the same options rights.

I actually have a first hand perspective on this, being that the neighbors are rather close, and prone to throw somewhat wild (loud really) parties. Ebonics and lingo aside... my hearing is not what it used to be. So If I can make out the details of the crime you are boasting about committing to your buddies (which I then relay to a cop that happened to be in the neighborhood...because I called them), solely because you were shouting it out in the middle of the yard, loud enough for me to hear next door. ...Hay it's all you. ...But that's the price one pays for waking me up at 2:00am <- Now that's (a true story, and) the best example of lacking discretion I can think of.

Intent, on the other hand, would be using a parabolic microphone to hear a whispered conversation in a closed room (where privacy is to be expected).

But Google isn't aggregating the information.  Your ad analogy also leaves something out as you are intentionally submitting your information to an aggregator (the newspaper).

Right, Just like the folks on Social Networking sites intentionally submit their personal info to the Social Network - Which is a Public Forum no different then the Personals Column of the Local (equally public) News Paper.

I suppose something in the middle would be more to the point, i.e. I'm walking by and you're talking on your cell phone about leaving the country.  Then I tell someone who robs you.  Did you broadcast to me specifically?  No.  But it was public.  So did I do anything wrong?

Hm... (Muddy Waters...) I'll go both ways on this. If someone is having a private (phone) conversation in a public place, and they're keeping their voice low (as a best effort) to avoid broadcasting the information then that would be you. However this does require an overt breach of privacy and intent.

Now (Much closer to the typical Social Networking Herd) If someone was yelling (as they often do) into one of those silly ear-bud widgets. ...Which leaves most of us wondering if they are actually talking to us, are completely insane, or are in the middle of a phone call ... Then it their own fault.

If you lose your wallet and somebody finds it, then strips out the cash and tosses the rest into a dumpster. Did they rob you? No. Were they nice to you & a kind person? (hell) no. Is it your fault for leaving your wallet on the roof of the car when you drove away giving them access to it in the first place? Damn Straight.

[being divulged in a public forum]

Sorry Joker, but your example would be more appropriate without the aggregation.  This site aggregating the information makes Wraith's example closer.

Not really, Wrath's example leaves out one critical point. That is a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy. The example openly admits the Wraith is casing my house where I'm to have a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy. My example allows for the fact that the critical personal information is already being divulged in a public forum by me. There is no expectation of privacy in a public forum (real/reasonable or imaginary).

Therein lying my point, sheeple babble their entire life story in a public forum without any regard for how that information may be used by other people who are also active in said public forum (that may have ill intent). That quit simply puts them at the center of the causality of their downfalls (because they didn't stop and think about the ramifications of their own actions).

If somebody googles a persons name, and google pulls up comments made by that person saying here's my house and I'm on vacation ... Is google guilty of anything? No.